Mazda MX5-RF

galvo_clare

vintagevrs wrote: »

If they did a coupe with a bit more power and an lsd I think it would sell very well. It's a good looking motor but does seem under powered. I know that was fine in the original mx5 but it's put on a bit of weight since then.

It's not much heavier than the original and well lighter than the previous version.
The 2.0 litre comes with a lsd and is a good deal faster than the outgoing 2.0.
The 1.5 is around the same performance as the outgoing car given its lighter weight. I drove both at a European pre-launch.

Dartz

I want it.

Can never afford it, but if there was one car to replace the 8 it'd be the RF

Interslice

Plenty of power for the road Imo. Just be a bit flat on a track I'd say. If you want to drag race diesels on the motorway buy another car!

RobAMerc

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

130bhp is pretty poor for a 1.5 these days. Honda was getting that out of a 1.5 back in the mid 90's.

It still should be adequate enough though but what a great car it would be if it had something like a b16 Honda engine fitted or something with a turbo nearing 200bhp.

You could get more out of a 1.5 for sure but then you'd might not get the characteristics that they were clearly after.

I wouldn't like a 1.5 180bhp engine I had to rev the nuts off of to get anywhere with. I'd much prefer a lower bhp engine that had a more even power band and lower end torque.

I absolutely applaud Mazda for building a car with a certain ethos and sticking with it - now that is something no one else is doing, certainly not in the motor industry !

CianRyan

You can all probably guess what I think of it but I'll say it anyway.
It's absolutely beautiful.

I haven't driven one yet but I've sat in one and had a good poke around with a Mazda sales man. The car is tiny, it looks smaller than my own but somehow manages to feel much wider on the inside.
The driving position is perfect and the interior is well styled, modern but without distraction. Your attention. Is focuses forward, where it should be.

As for the engine, the car has never been about going fast and I think the ones looking for more power are the ones coming from cars which are much more powerful. This could cloud your vision, Mazda's vision even of building a modern sports car with the soul of a classic.

No one else in the general consumer sector has as much focus on striping weight and tuning the chassis instead. To me, that's what a sports car should be.


That's a lot of rambling anyway, I am in full support of the new RF and I REALLY want one.

Ardennes1944

I will be living in Switzerland for at least another 2 years waiting for the missus to finish her PhD. Which means I'm stuck driving the Grande punto sporting until then (cars here are ridiculously expensive) .
When we move I'm treating myself and this looks ideal. Love the RF version

noelf

Have you seen EVO twin test of Toyota GT86 and MX5 on YouTube .. despite 40 less bhp it was a tenth of a second faster on a lap ..

vintagevrs

Here it is for handiness:

I get the whole concept, and really like the look of the MX5 and what Maxda have done. But even in that video he says it doesn't have the power to maintain a slide, where as the GT86 does. He talks about having fun is the main thing, and not going faster at a track day, and it looks like the GT86 is doing that for him. He can maintain the slides more in the Toyota, and if the MX5 had a bit more poke he would be able to do the same in the MX5. That's why I think 180 - 200 bhp would make it better.

The fun part of a car is getting it on it's limit and getting the rear to move about a bit. To do that in the MX5 you really need to be pushing it hard and committed which would only be possible on a track day. Maybe it's a bit easier in the wet, but who wants to drive a convertible in the wet.

JohnBoy26

RobAMerc wrote: »

You could get more out of a 1.5 for sure but then you'd might not get the characteristics that they were clearly after.

I wouldn't like a 1.5 180bhp engine I had to rev the nuts off of to get anywhere with. I'd much prefer a lower bhp engine that had a more even power band and lower end torque.

I absolutely applaud Mazda for building a car with a certain ethos and sticking with it - now that is something no one else is doing, certainly not in the motor industry !

Nothing at all exciting about that 1.5 Mazda engine though. Something like a honda b16 or b18 needs to be revved to get the best out of it but it's an engine that likes being revved and it's what makes it exciting and the car it's fitted to exciting to drive.

It's just my opinion but I think the mx5 would be better with a more powerful unit. Not that there is anything wrong with the 1.5, I'm sure it will be a very reliable unit. I just don't think it will get the best out of the mx5's chassis though.

Drummerboy08

I've driven many high powered cars around Mondello park, but the best craic I had was behind the wheel of a 1.25 Fiesta Zetec Race car.

Power isn't everything ladies.

Alun

I've no idea what the current 1.5 engine is like, but I have owned a Mk 1 1.8 and currently have a Mk 3 1.8 and they also both love being revved. In fact with the Mk 1 1.8 you had to because it had virtually no low end torque, but the Mk 3 is a lot better in that regard.

Dartz

RobAMerc wrote: »

You could get more out of a 1.5 for sure but then you'd might not get the characteristics that they were clearly after.

I wouldn't like a 1.5 180bhp engine I had to rev the nuts off of to get anywhere with. I'd much prefer a lower bhp engine that had a more even power band and lower end torque.

I absolutely applaud Mazda for building a car with a certain ethos and sticking with it - now that is something no one else is doing, certainly not in the motor industry !

Try an RX8.... 1.3l, 220bhp. Brrrrrraaapppp!
Same chassis as the last-gen MX5 too, with more rigidity

RobAMerc

Alun wrote: »

I've no idea what the current 1.5 engine is like, but I have owned a Mk 1 1.8 and currently have a Mk 3 1.8 and they also both love being revved. In fact with the Mk 1 1.8 you had to because it had virtually no low end torque, but the Mk 3 is a lot better in that regard.

I bought a mk1 1.8 after driving a couple of 1.6s because it was waaaayyyy torquier. Its was a cracking little engine you could drive round the city like and auto - by just sticking it in 2nd.